AVERSIVE PROPERTIES OF THE NEGATIVE STIMULUS IN A SUCCESSIVE DISCRIMINATION<sup>1</sup>

Rilling, Mark; Askew, H.; Ahlskog, J. Eric; Krämer, Thomas

doi:10.1901/jeab.1969.12-917

Cited by 86 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, pigeons and/or rats have been reported to obtain time-outs from various simple fixed-ratio (Appel, 1963;Azrin, 1961;Dardano, 1973;Thompson, 1964Thompson, , 1965 and fixed-interval (Brown & Flory, 1972) schedules, as well as from various component schedules of a multiple schedule of food reinforcement (Rilling, Askew, Ahlskog, & Kramer, 1969;Terrace, 1968; a multiple schedule requires the successive presentation of two or more independent schedules of reinforcement, each in the presence of a different exteroceptive stimulus). Since many investigators (e.g., Azrin, 1961;Rilling, et aI., 1969;Terrace, 1968) consider the time-out response to be an escape response and, thus, a quantitative index of aversiveness, it is surprising that relatively few studies have examined conditions under which time-outs are obtained from a stimulus associated with both positive reinforcement and the known aversive stimulus, electric shock (Azrin & Holz, 1966).…”

Section: Colorado State University Fort Collins Colorado 80521mentioning

confidence: 99%

The absence of time-out responding by pigeons during shock-correlated stimuli

Hittesdorf

Richards

1975

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the present experiment was to determine if pigeons would obtain time-out from stimuli associated with independent schedules of intermittent food and electric shock presentation. Few time-outs were obtained from any of the shock-correlated stimuli, but when reinforcement and shock contingencies were removed during one stimulus, i.e., during an extinction component of a multiple scheQule, all subjects obtained a large and consistent amount of time-out. A clear correlation between time-out and behavioral contrast, which occurred when one component of the multiple schedule was correlated with extinction but not when it was correlated with shock, was obtained. While the absence of time-outs during shock-correlated stimuli could be explained as generalization of punishment to the time-out key, the present findings might suggest that the time-out response is an unreliable index of stimulus aversiveness.

show abstract

Section: Colorado State University Fort Collins Colorado 80521mentioning

confidence: 99%

The absence of time-out responding by pigeons during shock-correlated stimuli

Hittesdorf

Richards

1975

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Coughlin (1972) has questioned whether it is the aversiveness of S-that supports time-out responding. Coughlin (1970;cited in Coughlin, 1972cited in Coughlin, , 1973 was unable to replicate the findings of Rilling et al (1969) when the effects of stimulus change were controlled. Coughlin (1972) found that the addition of electric shock punishment for operant-key responding during S-, a procedure one would expect to increase the aversiveness of S-, actually decreased the rate of responding on the time-out key.…”

mentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Time-out responding from S+ was virtually nonexistent. Although they eliminated several alternatives to the escape from S-account of their data, Rilling et al (1969) pointed out that positive reinforcement by stimulus change rather than negative reinforcement by termination of S-could not be ruled out. Terrace (1971) included conditions to control for displaced pecking and stimulus change.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

“…The criterion that termination of S-reinforces some "new" response in order to be considered a conditioned negative reinforcer is not really met in the work of Rilling et al (1969) or Terrace (1971Terrace ( , 1972, since the time-out, or escape, response for the pigeons was pecking a second key after they had already learned to peck a nearby key for food reinforcers; pecking a key in one location may be a different response from pecking another key, but it is far from clear that it is a new response. Also, the frequency of responses to produce time-out is not particularly high.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The effect of the controllability of auditory discriminative stimuli in the performance of go/no-go discriminations by pigeons

Rodgers

Tomie

Thomas

1980

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Compared with their performance with localized (on-key) visual stimuli, pigeons are notoriously poor at performing go/no-go discriminations when keypecking for food in the presence of auditory discriminative stimuli. The difference might reflect the fact that an aversive visual onkey stimulus signaling nonreward can be escaped by looking away and not pecking, which contributes to the measure of good discriminative performance, while an auditory stimulus cannot be escaped. In Experiment I, discriminative performance was significantly improved by providing pigeons with a response incompatible with keypecking by which they could escape a tone S+ and a tone S-. However, the pattern, frequency, and duration of escape responses were found to be insufficient to explain the improvement. In Experiment 2, it was found that the capacity to escape only S+ or only S-enhanced discriminative performance as much as the capacity to escape both. It is theorized that the Pavlovian relationship between the absence of the discriminative stimuli and the nonoccurrence of food might transfer to the instrumental relationships learned in a go/no-go discrimination. The possibility that intermittent stimuli command more attention than continuous stimuli is also considered.In a number of unpublished investigations in our own laboratory and those of others, it has been observed that pigeons do not perform go/no-go discriminations well when the discriminative stimuli are auditory (tones), the reinforcer is access to grain, and the rewarded operant is keypecking. Powell (1973) reported poor discriminative performance, as indexed by the percent of total responses during S+ (the "discrimination ratio"), in a variable-interval extinction (VI-EXT) discrimination when the VI signal (S+) was silence and the EXT signal (S-) was a 1,234-Hz 90-dB tone, relative to

show abstract

“…Since the empirical reality of these phenomena has been demonstrated (Reynolds, 1961;Rilling, Askew, Ahlskog, & Kramer, 1969; Terrace, 1971), it would seem to be incumbent upon proponents of gradient-interaction theory to show how the theory might be expanded to account for the foregoing byproducts.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An experimental study of by-products of successive discrimination learning in the pigeon

Damron

Burstein

1981

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Four experimental groups and a control group, of five pigeons each, were trained to successively discriminate a vertical amber line from one oriented either 30 or 60 deg to the right. Depending on group, pecks were intermittently reinforced by either 2.5 or 5.0 sec access to the food hopper. During discrimination, the subjects were provided a second response key, a peck upon which provided a 5-sec time-out (TO) from either the positive or the negative stimulus. Frequency of response on both the TO key and the discrimination key was monitored throughout. After the discrimination training, all subjects were given a postdiscrimination generalization test. Although peak shift was not obtained, the results support the hypothesis that byproducts of successive discrimination learning are functions of magnitude of S+ reinforcement and degree of S+/S-separation. It was concluded that the results are consistent with a conflict theory of by-products of discrimination learning.In successive discrimination training, a subject is alternately presented two stimuli: S+, which is correlated with reinforcement, and S-, which is correlated with nonreinforcement or extinction. Three well-known "by-products" usually accompany the development of differential stimulus control in this procedure. These are peak shift, positive behavioral contrast, and S-aversiveness. 1 According to Terrace, each of these by-products disappears with extended discrimination training (Terrace, 1966(Terrace, , 1971, and none develops if the discrimination is acquired without "errors," that is, responses to S- (Terrace, 1966).According to Terrace (1971, 1972), by-products of discrimination learning originate in the occurrence of frustration-producing responses in the S-condition. However, this view has not held up well to experimental test (see, e.g., Rilling, 1977, pp. 469-470). Moreover, Terrace's theory cannot readily account for by-products occurring in the context of aversive conditioning procedures wherein S-is correlated with the nonaversive condition (Hearst, 1969, p. 36).In noting the foregoing problems, Hearst (1969) has questioned the parsimony of the S-aversiveness concept and, in the same stroke, made the case for a more general gradient-interaction model of discrimination learning such as the one developed by Spence (1937). Such a model is not without convincing empirical support (see, e.g., Hearst, 1968Hearst, , 1969 Terrace, 1971), it would seem to be incumbent upon proponents of gradient-interaction theory to show how the theory might be expanded to account for the foregoing byproducts.In this spirit, the purpose of this study was to investigate aspects of a general gradient-interaction theory, wherein it is proposed that S-aversiveness and related by-products of discrimination learning are functions of dispositional conflict at S-between inhibitory and generalized excitatory tendencies accruing to that stimulus as a result of discrimination training.The experiment below specifically examines two conflict-affecting variables: degree of S...

show abstract

AVERSIVE PROPERTIES OF THE NEGATIVE STIMULUS IN A SUCCESSIVE DISCRIMINATION¹

Cited by 86 publications

References 15 publications

The absence of time-out responding by pigeons during shock-correlated stimuli

The absence of time-out responding by pigeons during shock-correlated stimuli

The effect of the controllability of auditory discriminative stimuli in the performance of go/no-go discriminations by pigeons

An experimental study of by-products of successive discrimination learning in the pigeon

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

AVERSIVE PROPERTIES OF THE NEGATIVE STIMULUS IN A SUCCESSIVE DISCRIMINATION1

Cited by 86 publications

References 15 publications

The absence of time-out responding by pigeons during shock-correlated stimuli

The absence of time-out responding by pigeons during shock-correlated stimuli

The effect of the controllability of auditory discriminative stimuli in the performance of go/no-go discriminations by pigeons

An experimental study of by-products of successive discrimination learning in the pigeon

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

AVERSIVE PROPERTIES OF THE NEGATIVE STIMULUS IN A SUCCESSIVE DISCRIMINATION¹